I prefer to go with Rich Hickey's definition of "simple" (https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-E

I prefer to go with Rich Hickey's definition of "simple" (https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy). That's why I chose Elixir for our product, and am so glad I did; it may be shiny and new, but it's dead simple. The "boring" familiar choice would have been Ruby / Node, etc. I think the problem is when people jump on shiny new bandwagons just because of the shiny factor. When instead they should ask: "Does this shiny new technology radically simplify something that is currently complex and is at the core of my application?" (again, going with the above talk's definition of "simple")